Ipad patent problem

This problem can be roughly divided into two categories: one is "visual iPad", whose appearance patents are generally similar in all kinds of Pad designs, but if there are obvious differences in appearance requirements, it is not considered infringement. Although all kinds of PADs are reminiscent of iPad, it is subjective to judge whether there is infringement as long as they are not completely imitated. From the case of spark suing Chery QQ, even if Apple sues other PADs in China, it may not get any benefits, so you can see that China's mobile phones and cars are full of imitations. The other is the "invisible iPad", which is its inherent technology. In recent years, a large number of public technologies have been accumulated from the PC market and the mobile phone market, so it will not be said that it is also infringement. Of course, there must be some valid patents of Apple, and most manufacturers will choose to bypass them. On the other hand, due to patent attacks between major manufacturers, it is difficult to guarantee that no one's products will use other people's patents. Many times, patents may only be chips that need mutual authorization (such as between ZTE and Ericsson now), and sometimes these manufacturers will not file patent lawsuits unless they have to.